Speaker, colleagues, just from the IFP's perspective, I would like to say that in the end, all the parties agreed to the names proposed. However, I must say that the processes leading up to that was less than ideal.
We were presented with a list of names through the internal processes of the department and the committee, which were frankly ridiculous. The Minister is entitled to make the choice herself. The function of the process before then is to provide her with a short list of sufficient names for her to be able to exercise her mind. And what, in fact, we received was something that would have almost compelled her to take all the names on the list, bar one or two, and that is completely unacceptable.
The list was not balanced in respect of the legal requirements of what had to be included in the list. It was not racially balanced; it didn't adequately deal with skilled incumbents who might have been kept on to do another term.
So we are happy with the outcome, but I do think that in future we should reflect upon the processes that go astray. So we wish the Minister well in choosing from the list that she has.
I do think that she could have had a few more options, but what she has is a good, sound basis. Thank you.